Landing : Athabascau University

Josipa Petrunić

Last updated March 31, 2013 - 1:29pm by Mark A. McCutcheon

Josipa Petrunić, SSHRCC Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology, U of Toronto

“The Digital Democratic Deficit: an analysis of efforts and outcomes related to digitised elections and campaigning”

Abstract: In so far as “digital technology” includes all computer-based tools, it is possible to talk about “digital elections” and “digital campaigning”. “Digital elections” refers to voting that requires computer-based tools to be completed. Such tools include computer-based databases, which are used to count and store analogue votes (i. e. paper ballots), computer-based voting websites, digital ballots that are scanned and “counted” by computer hardware and software, and telephone voting programs that use a combination of analogue (push button) voting with digitized recording programs that count the telephone votes.

“Digital campaigning” refers to any effort by a candidate or political party to contact, communicate with, and convince voters by using computer-based tools. Those tools include computer-based databases used by call centres and campaign teams to generate and track voter identification, Internet-based tools such as conventional websites, social media networks, online advertising, email-based surveys, and e-blasts. I will argue that, in so far as we can speak about “digital elections” and “digital campaigning”, we can also talk about a “digital democratic deficit”. A “digital democratic deficit” refers to the inability of digital technologies to accurately reflect the intention of voters; it also refers to the ability of digital technologies to mislead or manipulate the voter.

While some political pundits are quick to appeal to “digital” technologies as a solution for falling voter numbers and rising voter apathy, this paper will present a series of outstanding concerns over the capacity of “digital elections” to identify (or obscure) voter intentions and the ability of “digital campaigning” to enable (or disable) voter agency. I will explore digital technologies associated with “digital elections” and “digital campaigning” in Alberta and in Canada more broadly. I will identify areas of possible uncertainly, insecurity, and manipulation that create space for a “democratic deficit”.


These comments are moderated. Your comment will not be visible unless accepted by the content owner.

Only simple HTML formatting is allowed and any hyperlinks will be stripped away. If you need to include a URL then please simply type it so that users can copy and paste it if needed.